"ART" - a One Word Oxymoron

[Garrette]

Interesting indeed. Not surprising at all, but interesting.

JonathanQuick made claims about "lefty" art and challenged me to find any bad art by Republicans. I did so quite easily. He has had time to froth and foam and spout nonsense but no time it seems to respond to me again.

I can't tell if he is a troll or a deluded person, but since the behavior is indistinguishable here, I suppose it doesn't matter.

Regardless, I'll post til it no longer interests me or becomes morally repugnant. JQ may just be the right wing's vitriolic equivalent of DOC.

 

[Earthborn]

Skill can be measured by the amount of automated assistance -- a hammer and chisel require more skill to wield artfully than a numerically-controlled stone cutter.

Getting the numerically controlled stone cutter to do anything can require a lot skill. Recently many artists have started using tools such as 3d printing and laser carving, but the required 3d models still require considerable skill to produce.

Effort can be measured in man-hours, or even calories.

Measuring in man-hours or calories does not necessarily give the same answer for "effort". Designing a 3d model to be 3d printed can take a lot of man-hours, but not too many calories. Smashing rocks to pieces with a hammer will require lots of calories, but not necessarily a lot of man-hours.

 

[Fnord]

Getting the numerically controlled stone cutter to do anything can require a lot skill. Recently many artists have started using tools such as 3d printing and laser carving, but the required 3d models still require considerable skill to produce.

And where do these models come from? Another NC machine? And where does that NC machine get its model? A third NC machine? Somewhere along the way, a real artist hand-carved the original work from which all other copies were made.

Measuring in man-hours or calories does not necessarily give the same answer for "effort". Designing a 3d model to be 3d printed can take a lot of man-hours, but not too many calories. Smashing rocks to pieces with a hammer will require lots of calories, but not necessarily a lot of man-hours.

Then measure both processes in terms of both time and energy, then compare the quality of the final works.

 

[Cavemonster]

Please explain the "art" to me of:

placing a crucifix in a jar of your own urine, simply to mock and ridicule Catholics

1) The work is a photograph of a crucifix in a jar of urine, not the physical objects.

2) Andres Serrano is himself a Catholic, and while he has avoided being specific on his intended meaning for the piece, his comments have suggested that his purpose was to comment on the commercialization and fetishization of Christianity. Sister Wendy Beckett, a nun who is widely respected for her art criticism, described that she saw the piece as a comment on the modern world's treatment of Jesus's love. There's no intelligent reason to say it's purpose is ridicule of Catholics.

 

[Earthborn]

Somewhere along the way, a real artist hand-carved the original work from which all other copies were made.

3d models are usually designed on a computer, by the artist skilled in designing 3d computer models. Such 3d printed art is usually not just a copy of another work, but original work printed only once.

 

[Ron_Tomkins]

Classical art has been corrupted by the contemporary Left.
"Art" is a one-word oxymoron.

Proof:

http://whencrapisart.blogspot.com

[irony]Congratulations. You've made your powerful, solid, objective statement and backed it up with compelling, scientific evidence[/irony]

 

[Garrette]

The error in price you cited is 2.012%.

Forgive me. I made the corrections you so lovingly pointed out.

Highlighting is mine.

Did anyone else notice this? Forgive me for being slow, but is what we have here an example of JonathanQuick making a vague assertion and using a webpage he created as his proof?

Oh my gars and starters.

 

[tsig]

You're missing the point, entirely. I'm sure it's not accidental either.

THE point being made is that when anyone can throw blobs of paint onto a canvas, it is NOT "art."
Read that sentence over and over until it sinks in, no matter how long it takes.

My SECONDARY POINT is that taxpayers should NOT have vulgar trash, or whatever YOU may wish to call it, shoved down their throats ON TOP of paying the vulgar trasher for producing his vulgar trash.

Do you have any children? Grandchildren? Nephews? Nieces?

Imagine taking them to the "art" museum for a day. You enter a room and there are five naked homosexuals with sadomasochistic tools, doing whatever they wish. Your youngsters under your charge look on, not knowing what to say or do.

The room monitor does not blink, but tells you "This is art. If you don't like it, leave."



Like whatever you wish. Given that the United States is bankrupt, why should tax dollars be spent on ANY "art" by anyone?

I'm all for eliminating all such funding.

If you think that Stalin is best known for "banning art," why don't you provide some verifiable references to substantiate your belief.

To the best of my knowledge, Stalin was a godless Lefty, like you.
He is best known for murdering 40,000,000 people.

The art isn't in throwing blobs at the canvas the art is in knowing where to throw them.

 

[Fnord]

3d models are usually designed on a computer, by the artist skilled in designing 3d computer models. Such 3d printed art is usually not just a copy of another work, but original work printed only once.

Well, that explains the lack of creativity in our current media market -- everything comes down to some computer geek trying to produce images that will have greater appeal than anything crafted by hand.

Sure, 'Avatar' is known for its fantastic imagery, but did it win an Oscar for 'Best Picture'? No. Instead, 'Avatar' and director James Cameron picked up three awards in technical categories: visual effects, art direction, and cinematography, thus demonstrating that technical artifice is not art.

 

[Brainache]

Well, that explains the lack of creativity in our current media market -- everything comes down to some computer geek trying to produce images that will have greater appeal than anything crafted by hand.

Sure, 'Avatar' is known for its fantastic imagery, but did it win an Oscar for 'Best Picture'? No. Instead, 'Avatar' and director James Cameron picked up three awards in technical categories: visual effects, art direction, and cinematography, thus demonstrating that technical artifice is not art.

So now the Oscars are used as a measure of artistic merit? Better not tell Peter Jackson, it'll go to his head.

 

[GreyArea]

Classical art has been corrupted by the contemporary Left.

The contemporary left has no effect on the art made in the Ancient World. Works are still being produced in our time in classical styles.

The art isn't in throwing blobs at the canvas the art is in knowing where to throw them.

I like this.

I find it telling that your link does not show art that I consider far inferior to the examples given: that of the contemporary artist who paints those sicky sweet Christian -undertoned and Norman Rockwell flavored scenes of idyllic snow-covered countrysides. I can't recall his name and can't bring myself to spend time googling him.

I think you may be referring to Thomas Kinkade. I am a strong proponent of realism, but his stuff is: Utter. Schlock. Light does not look like that! I think Margaret Keane may be one of the few painters worse than him.

Give me Frank Wright, Alex Gnidziejko, or even Norman Rockwell any day.

There is no point painting exactly what is seen when a photograph can do the same.

Ah, but the challenge is the point. For me, anyway. I like paintings that are photorealistic and photographs that are abstract because they go against what is easy for the medium.

Why don't you find SOME examples of Bad Art by Republicans..

I think Kinkade is a conservative. He's certainly a born-again.

Either way, there have been plenty of artists opposed to the Left. You've obviously never heard of the Futurist movement of the early twentieth century. Many of these artists were fascists, including Mario Sironi and Ardengo Soffici. (How are you going to explain to the children the title of that latter example?)

[Soffici] regarded the United States of America as "false", "transitory" and "ephemeral". It was a "non-civilisation" where the spirituality of art was suffocated by the barbaric vulgarity of a people without history and without tradition, and incapable, therefore, of creating a true civilization. To Soffici and other moralists of Italian Fascism, US civilisation represented "impending modernity", that is to say, a violent negation of the Italian genius; it was necessary to wage a holy war against the American monster to save Italian civilization.

Wikipedia

Leftists DO like to use "Republican" and "Nazi" interchangeably.

Nevermind that they are not the same thing. But if you insist.... You do seem to be very concerned about entartete Kunst.

 

[Fnord]

So now the Oscars are used as a measure of artistic merit?

Since their inception. Deal with it.

 

[Andrew Wiggin]

Since this thread has already godwinned itself; The concept of 'degenerate art' is hardly a new one, but nothing I personally want to hitch my wagon to. Obviously some opinions differ.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degenerate_art

 

[JonathanQuick]

[irony]Congratulations. You've made your powerful, solid, objective statement and backed it up with compelling, scientific evidence[/irony]

I am a collection of water, calcium and organic molecules called Carl Sagan"

Carl Sagan

Ron, you are clearly very confused.

The SUBJECT, above, is "ART." Topics pertaining to SCIENCE can be found in an entirely different thread.

Now as to your quoting Carl Sagan, he ALSO said some extremely ignorant, and some very hateful things. One of his stupider remarks, NOT taken out of context, was "Sex was invented."

Here's a hint, Ron: Sex was NOT "invented".

But back to the subject of "ART", viz. what is, and is not, in the opinion of not a few people.

I happened to be listening to classical music on cable television this morning. A rather older piece caught my ear after only a few notes, and since I enjoy it so much, I like to try to identify as much of it as I can, if possible. My first thought was Praetorius.
It was indeed his Terpsichore. That was my vague impression, but simply getting that composer right was enough.

I later heard something that was almost certainly Beethoven, and strong stuff. A symphony I surmised. It was #2, Larghetto.

Those are truly art, by any conceivable definition of the term.

The musical equivalent of the dreck on the OP website would be something like the sound of poop splatting on a concrete floor. No doubt many here would pretend to love such a work... and pay millions of dollars for it, if they had such money.

 

[Brainache]

...
Sure, 'Avatar' is known for its fantastic imagery, but did it win an Oscar for 'Best Picture'? No. Instead, 'Avatar' and director James Cameron picked up three awards in technical categories: visual effects, art direction, and cinematography, thus demonstrating that technical artifice is not art.

So now the Oscars are used as a measure of artistic merit? Better not tell Peter Jackson, it'll go to his head.

Since their inception. Deal with it.

You didn't quote the bolded part. Do you know how many Oscars The Lord Of The Rings movies won? Do you know how much of those movies was CGI? I think there are some very good reasons why Avatar didn't win best picture and they have nothing to do with CGI.

But really the Oscars is a popularity contest, sometimes pictures of great artistic merit win and sometimes they don't. How many Oscars did Citizen Kane^WP win? One, for best writing. All of that innovation and brilliance and nine nominations, yet it only won one Oscar, therefore using your logic Citizen Kane has less artistic merit than Avatar...

 

[MontagK505]

Well, that explains the lack of creativity in our current media market -- everything comes down to some computer geek trying to produce images that will have greater appeal than anything crafted by hand.

Sure, 'Avatar' is known for its fantastic imagery, but did it win an Oscar for 'Best Picture'? No. Instead, 'Avatar' and director James Cameron picked up three awards in technical categories: visual effects, art direction, and cinematography, thus demonstrating that technical artifice is not art.

Actually a lot of the concept art was created without computers. Cameron said in an interview that some of the creatures including the Na'vi were done with Z-Brush. But he wanted actual models to examine.

 

[Robin]

Whenever I find art I don't like, I just don't look at it any more.

Have you ever tried that JonathanQuick?

 

[BobHaulk]

Stay tuned, Ronny. I have much more you would do well to learn.

Have you any idea - any at all - any clue of what Johann Sebastian Bach, truly an artist, had to say about the purpose of music, in stark contrast to your satanic giggling?

That's a good one, huh. YOU knowing what JS Bach said about music....

Frank Zappa said art is making something out of nothing and selling it.
You seem to have a hard on for Mablethorpe, does his art stir something deep in you? What's so great about bach anyway? music is music and just because it appeals to your pretensions doesn't make it better or worse than any other music. To quote Zappa again music is a sculpture carved out of air.

 

[Andrew Wiggin]

One man's bach concerto is another man's lady gaga song and dance routine. I love these pretentious efforts to quantify good taste. They never end well.

 

[lionking]

One man's bach concerto is another man's lady gaga song and dance routine. I love these pretentious efforts to quantify good taste. They never end well.

Look on the bright side though. We now have the final, infallible arbiter of art. If anyone wonders if they should like a painting or sculpture, it's a simple matter of referring it to JonathanQuick.